Chris Henry: Assault Accusation...Claims are false *Updated*

[the kid 05]

Who has he suspended that there was not evidence to back it up even prior to the court case? Pacman was in a public place and eye wittness all over the place add to that a history of bad behavior. He got what was coming and no I don't think Goodell has crossed any line he is doing what Tags should have been doing a long time ago.

the stripper who said Pacman chomped on lied. the DNA was a miss match. They had a special announcment during the Yankees/Dimondbacks game. That was a part of the "public place", "eye witteness" theory.

 

[joseephuss]

In order for either Pacman or Henry to get reinstated to the NFL, they have to adhere to any rulings from the courts in their pending cases. I think that is why each have pending cases listed in their official suspensions.

If they win those cases, then they meet the criteria. If they lose those cases, then they have to serve time, do probation or whatever the court decides in order to comply with their NFL suspension. Losing those pending cases listed won't add games to their suspension unless they fail to follow their sentences.

It makes perfect sense to include those particular pending cases in the suspensions. It is unlikely that any of those cases are going to result in significant jail time(more than a year). Goodell could have suspended Henry for 8 games just for the stuff he has pled guilty and not included the pending cases. Then once the pending cases were done, he possibly would be faced with adding time to Henry's sentence. I think he wanted to avoid that. If Henry just complies with the courts decision win or lose, he will be abiding by the suspension criteria. Essentially Henry is getting a break. Goodell could have said it is an 8 game suspension that can get longer if he loses his pending cases.

Of course both guys have to avoid more trouble in order to gain reinstatement. No more new cases. The Las Vegas incident is not officially listed as a pending case against Pacman because there have been no official charges.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

the stripper who said Pacman chomped on lied. the DNA was a miss match. They had a special announcment during the Yankees/Dimondbacks game. That was a part of the "public place", "eye witteness" theory.

No no no just ask SB or Burm they will tell you that it was withoyut a doubt all Jones fault so therefore stuff liek this cannot be true.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

OK, I admit I haven't read the whole thread before posting this, but...

I've read 60 posts and this same line has been posted three times and has been wrong every time. The Commish has NO burden of proof that I'm aware of. He merely has to determine that a player's actions are detrimental to the league.

I don't know why that concept is so difficult for people to grasp, they go way above and beyond explaining what is necessary other than what it is, Goodell protecting the image of the league and it's players, I don't think he gives a damn if they are truly guilty or innocent, just that they are jagoffs putting a dent in the league's image

is it harsh? yes, that's w/o doubt, but that's what needs to be done when the arrest rate for NFL players is spiraling out of control and people start to voice their concerns, even from his own employees, the players, the interests he's supposed to be looking out for the most

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I don't know why that concept is so difficult for people to grasp, they go way above and beyond explaining what is necessary other than what it is, Goodell protecting the image of the league and it's players, I don't think he gives a damn if they are truly guilty or innocent, just that they are jagoffs putting a dent in the league's image

is it harsh? yes, that's w/o doubt, but that's what needs to be done when the arrest rate for NFL players is spiraling out of control and people start to voice their concerns, even from his own employees, the players, the interests he's supposed to be looking out for the most

Your problem is that you fail to understand that we understand what his thinking is in terms of the leagues image yet still think hes playing with fire.

Harshness has nothing to do with it. He can ban them from the game for all I care if he is feeling that it would be for the best of the game once the best system in the world for determining whether or not an accusation is true or not goes through its paces. What it is is irresponsible. He does not have the experience, resources or the authority that the US legal system brings to bear to determine whether or not an allegation against someone is true or not.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Your problem is that you fail to understand that we understand what his thinking is in terms of the leagues image yet still think hes playing with fire.

he has to play w/ fire, the players getting into trouble have left him w/ no other recourse

but again, I doubt this hurts Goodell

He does not have the experience, resources or the authority that the US legal system brings to bear to determine whether or not an allegation against someone is true or not.

again, all he's determining is if their conduct is detrimental to the league, he's not deciding legal guilt or innocence, and getting your name on the police blogger is conduct detrimental as it jeopardizes the public's trust in the player's, as well as the league's, which Goodell is entrusted to enforce

btw, the NFL works seperately from the courts, so Goodell doesn't have to concern himself w/ who is guilty or innocent in a court of law, but if you want to try and read his mind, go right ahead

 

[peplaw06]

he has to play w/ fire, the players getting into trouble have left him w/ no other recourse

but again, I doubt this hurts Goodell



again, all he's determining is if their conduct is detrimental to the league, he's not deciding legal guilt or innocence, and getting your name on the police blogger is conduct detrimental as it jeopardizes the public's trust in the player's, as well as the league's, which Goodell is entrusted to enforce

btw, the NFL works seperately from the courts, so Goodell doesn't have to concern himself w/ who is guilty or innocent in a court of law, but if you want to try and read his mind, go right ahead

With such a vague standard, how can you possibly support Goodell 100%?? I'll tell you how... it's because no Cowboys have been punished yet.

"Conduct detrimental" could be anything. There are no lines drawn, except for what the Commish says. You just said getting your name on the police blogger is conduct detrimental.

What else is conduct detrimental? Going to a strip club? That's not illegal... but it could "jeopardize the public's trust in the player." How about getting drunk? Do you have to be arrested for it to be truly "detrimental?" Holding out could be considered conduct detrimental... How about being a jackarse to people? They suspend you for flipping off fans on the field, what about if you get caught doing it off the field?

I hope you get the point... your basic slippery slope argument.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

With such a vague standard, how can you possibly support Goodell 100%?? I'll tell you how... it's because no Cowboys have been punished yet.

if a Cowboy gets punished, then it's on him, but we have a good character group, so I'm not really worried about it

and I certainly don't care for players who have run-ins w/ the law, esp. multiple ones, even if it's on my own team, but nice of you to brand me as a hypocrite

"Conduct detrimental" could be anything. There are no lines drawn, except for what the Commish says. You just said getting your name on the police blogger is conduct detrimental.

What else is conduct detrimental? Going to a strip club? That's not illegal... but it could "jeopardize the public's trust in the player." How about getting drunk? Do you have to be arrested for it to be truly "detrimental?" Holding out could be considered conduct detrimental... How about being a jackarse to people? They suspend you for flipping off fans on the field, what about if you get caught doing it off the field?

I hope you get the point... your basic slippery slope argument.

it all comes down to if you can't do the time, don't do the crime, you stay out of trouble, you have no worries, I'm sorry, but give these players some accountability

the arrest rates have gone up, I don't know how anyone could be shocked and disgusted that a new commisioner is taking a hard-line stance, esp. when it's written in the CBA and all the players understand it, the union wants it, the players want it, some of the fans want it, I really see no problem here

btw, we're talking about getting charged w/ crimes, which is all Goodell is suspending, not flicking someone the bird or going to strip-clubs

 

[Bob Sacamano]

this argument brings up a good point, how do you implement change? how do you get the NFL players to start acting responsibly, or more exactly, how do you get the screw-ups to start acting responsibly, don't want to group NFL players all together because there are alot of players and lots of teams who aren't having players arrested, but anyways, what? it's obvious the old process failed, even when they met w/ the Commisioner to talk about their off-field transgressions, and got their 4-game suspension, the arrests sky-rocketed

in Goodell's case, he had to take the strong-arm approach, and who knows how long it will last, could he be less harsh? of course, but drastic times calls for drastic measures, I say we should give this process a year or 2 to see how it works, to see if it curbs the arrests and off-field transgressions, and also, to see how Goodell will carry out his plan, will he continue to be completely draconion, Fuzzy's favorite word ? or will he steep even further? for me, it's a wait and see process, and I'm hoping some players get the message, they know who they are, and wise-up, cuz again, this all wouldn't be taking place if 40/50-something odd individuals were being accountable

/rant

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

he has to play w/ fire, the players getting into trouble have left him w/ no other recourse

but again, I doubt this hurts Goodell



again, all he's determining is if their conduct is detrimental to the league, he's not deciding legal guilt or innocence, and getting your name on the police blogger is conduct detrimental as it jeopardizes the public's trust in the player's, as well as the league's, which Goodell is entrusted to enforce

btw, the NFL works seperately from the courts, so Goodell doesn't have to concern himself w/ who is guilty or innocent in a court of law, but if you want to try and read his mind, go right ahead

He lists allegations still pending in a court of law as the conduct detrimental to the league. You keep babbling that all he has to do is say that a player is detrimental to the league without even looking as to the source of why they are detriments to the league.

When Goodell suspends Jones citing a still pending obstruction case and suspends Henry for a pending DUI and a pending contributing to minors case he is saying that they did indeed perpetrate those crimes and are guilty. Your babbling that all Goodell has to do is state that they are detriments completely ignores this fact.

And he does not have to play with fire. Jones cases are set to be resolved in July and Im sure Henrys will be soon as well. Why jump the gun by a couple of months when there is absolutely no need. As has been stated repeatedly he could have suspended Johnson for his 8 games and the message would be sent to the players loud and clear and he could have waited a couple of months and done the same with the cases pending.

Its not as if Jones and Henry would be playing in September either way. As i have said it is completely irresponsible and unnecessary.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

this argument brings up a good point, how do you implement change? how do you get the NFL players to start acting responsibly, or more exactly, how do you get the screw-ups to start acting responsibly, don't want to group NFL players all together because there are alot of players and lots of teams who aren't having players arrested, but anyways, what? it's obvious the old process failed, even when they met w/ the Commisioner to talk about their off-field transgressions, and got their 4-game suspension, the arrests sky-rocketed

in Goodell's case, he had to take the strong-arm approach, and who knows how long it will last, could he be less harsh? of course, but drastic times calls for drastic measures, I say we should give this process a year or 2 to see how it works, to see if it curbs the arrests and off-field transgressions, and also, to see how Goodell will carry out his plan, will he continue to be completely draconion, Fuzzy's favorite word ? or will he steep even further? for me, it's a wait and see process, and I'm hoping some players get the message, they know who they are, and wise-up, cuz again, this all wouldn't be taking place if 40/50-something odd individuals were being accountable

/rant

For the eighth million time he could have come down hard on all of the players in question without listing cases that are still pending in a court of law as reasons for the suspensions. You dont think suspending Johnson for 8 games which is twice the amount of any suspension in the history of the league wouldnt send a message and get the players notice? You dont think following up in July on Jones or simply stating the offenses that they ahve actually been convicted of would send a loud and clear message?

Bottom line is that Goodell could have handled this much more responsibly with the exact same message being sent.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

He lists allegations still pending in a court of law as the conduct detrimental to the league. You keep babbling that all he has to do is say that a player is detrimental to the league without even looking as to the source of why they are detriments to the league.

anything that sheds a negative image on the players is conduct detrimental, and specifically in this case, being charged w/ crimes and arrest, note that this isn't just about PacMan, Henry and Tank, they are just the biggest offenders in his eyes, scapegoats if you will

you still ignore the fact that Goodell is duty-bound to look after the NFL player's image, which is exactly what he's doing

When Goodell suspends Jones citing a still pending obstruction case and suspends Henry for a pending DUI and a pending contributing to minors case he is saying that they did indeed perpetrate those crimes and are guilty. Your babbling that all Goodell has to do is state that they are detriments completely ignores this fact.

again, the NFL does not work w/ the courts, so Goodell doesn't have to be concerned w/ who is guilty or who is innocent

I like how you portray Goodell as the big, bad wolf who doesn't care about the justice system, but he's not passing guilt on their legal status, he has no reason to, so why should he?

And he does not have to play with fire. Jones cases are set to be resolved in July and Im sure Henrys will be soon as well. Why jump the gun by a couple of months when there is absolutely no need. As has been stated repeatedly he could have suspended Johnson for his 8 games and the message would be sent to the players loud and clear and he could have waited a couple of months and done the same with the cases pending.

he could have dealt w/ the process differently, but I don't see how that's really relevent because PacMan and Henry's numerous arrests are casting a negative image on the NFL's players, which is breaking their player contract, one they agreed to, they put it in his hands

Its not as if Jones and Henry would be playing in September either way. As i have said it is completely irresponsible and unnecessary.

in your opinion

 

[Bob Sacamano]

For the eighth million time he could have come down hard on all of the players in question without listing cases that are still pending in a court of law as reasons for the suspensions.

then what is he going to suspend them for? he might as well not suspend them because not listing any reasons for said suspension wouldn't hold up anywhere, and he'd definitely catch **** even Stalin recognized that he would need to lists reasons for executing people, even though they were made up, until his power became too great that he didn't have to

it does strike me as rather funny that 2 of the players who should really be concerned w/ the fairness of this process have agreed to it

btw, 8 games is only 3 games more than the suspension Albert Haynesworth got

 

[silverbear]

No no no just ask SB or Burm they will tell you that it was withoyut a doubt all Jones fault so therefore stuff liek this cannot be true.

Let it be noted that this is my first contribution to this thread, yet Fuzzy here is trying to tell y'all what I think, what my argument is gonna be...

I believe the phrase for that is "mindscrewed"... well, that's the PG version of the phrase I'm looking for...

For what it's worth, I have never passed judgement on Jones' guilt or innocence in that episode... when I have argued the merit's of the NFL's suspension of Pac-Man, it has been to debate those who would tell us that Goodell had no legal right to suspend him...

He did, and the reasons he gave were Jones' failure to report two different arrests to the league... whether or not he was guilty of the charges for which he was arrested is utterly irrelevant here, he was required to report the arrests, and he did not do so... for that, he was subject to suspension...

But hey, it sure is fun, watching Fuzzy put words in my mouth...

 

[Bob Sacamano]

it has been to debate those who would tell us that Goodell had no legal right to suspend him...

wait, noone ever said that, certainly not Fuzzy

btw, don't have to defend me from Fuzzy's childish remarks, even though they are appreciated

 

[silverbear]

Your problem is that you fail to understand that we understand what his thinking is in terms of the leagues image yet still think hes playing with fire.

Harshness has nothing to do with it. He can ban them from the game for all I care if he is feeling that it would be for the best of the game once the best system in the world for determining whether or not an accusation is true or not goes through its paces. What it is is irresponsible. He does not have the experience, resources or the authority that the US legal system brings to bear to determine whether or not an allegation against someone is true or not.

And once again, whether or not the allegations against Pac-Man are true are COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to the reasons for the suspension... he was suspended for FAILING TO REPORT TWO ARRESTS... he is guilty of failing to report those arrests, that is a violation of the new Player's Code of Conduct, now he's suspended...

Apparently, even HE recognizes that the suspension is legitimate, even if some in here (who like to pontificate on how their assorted adversaries can't grasp simple concepts) are too obtuse to recognize that fact... he must, inasmuch as he has dropped his appeal of that suspension...

Perhaps you'd be well-served to sit back and ponder the REASONS for Pac-Man's suspension, since you clearly don't grasp why that happened... once you do, you'll FINALLY understand that the suspension was entirely legitimate...

Had Jones not tried to hide those arrests, then Goodell would have had to wait for the outcome of the court cases before deciding what penalty to inflict, if any... but he did try to hide those arrests, and as a result got himself suspended...

It really is just that simple-- for those with the ability to grasp simple concepts...

 

[silverbear]

He lists allegations still pending in a court of law as the conduct detrimental to the league. You keep babbling that all he has to do is say that a player is detrimental to the league without even looking as to the source of why they are detriments to the league.

And that is indeed all Goodell needs to do...

You don't have to LIKE that, you might think that's wrong, but the plain truth is that's reality... those powers were given to him by the collective bargaining agreement...

Apparently you just don't understand that commissioners of the major sports are dictators, with virtually unlimited powers... their jobs were created with the intention of giving them such powers...

When Goodell suspends Jones citing a still pending obstruction case and suspends Henry for a pending DUI and a pending contributing to minors case he is saying that they did indeed perpetrate those crimes and are guilty. Your babbling that all Goodell has to do is state that they are detriments completely ignores this fact.

Makes sense to ignore something that is irrelevant...

Its not as if Jones and Henry would be playing in September either way. As i have said it is completely irresponsible and unnecessary.

How fortunate the league is that your opinion is insignificant...

 

[silverbear]

For the eighth million time he could have come down hard on all of the players in question without listing cases that are still pending in a court of law as reasons for the suspensions. You dont think suspending Johnson for 8 games which is twice the amount of any suspension in the history of the league wouldnt send a message and get the players notice? You dont think following up in July on Jones or simply stating the offenses that they ahve actually been convicted of would send a loud and clear message?

Bottom line is that Goodell could have handled this much more responsibly with the exact same message being sent.

No, the bottom line is that 99 per cent of football fans approve of what Goodell is doing... you say that the way he's handling things these days could blow up in his face, but in reality, it appears that his actions have made him POPULAR with most fans of the game...

For sure, I haven't seen any of the backlash that you keep warning us about... just a few contrarians like yourself, blowin' a lot of hot air...

Look around you, you can't help but notice that you have taken a position held by a fairly small minority of fans on this board... I believe this board is fairly representative of football fans in general when it comes to this issue, which is to say I believe the vast majority of fans have no problems whatsoever with the punishments Goodell has handed down to Jones or Henry...

 

[silverbear]

wait, noone ever said that, certainly not Fuzzy

btw, don't have to defend me from Fuzzy's childish remarks, even though they are appreciated

Oh, I know that you're more than capable of standing up for yourself... think of this not so much as me sticking up for you, but rather me piling on Fuzzy... LOL...

I mean, he DID call me out in this thread, didn't he??

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

anything that sheds a negative image on the players is conduct detrimental, and specifically in this case, being charged w/ crimes and arrest, note that this isn't just about PacMan, Henry and Tank, they are just the biggest offenders in his eyes, scapegoats if you will

you still ignore the fact that Goodell is duty-bound to look after the NFL player's image, which is exactly what he's doing

Wow they are scapegoats now. Thats the worst justification i have heard yet.

And as for this duty bound garbage its just something you made up. Fact is he listed pending allegations as reasons.

again, the NFL does not work w/ the courts, so Goodell doesn't have to be concerned w/ who is guilty or who is innocent

I like how you portray Goodell as the big, bad wolf who doesn't care about the justice system, but he's not passing guilt on their legal status, he has no reason to, so why should he?

When he lists pending cases as reasons for suspension that is a bad thing. Im not saying that he has to do anything i just think his arrogance in the matter is reprehensible.

he could have dealt w/ the process differently, but I don't see how that's really relevent because PacMan and Henry's numerous arrests are casting a negative image on the NFL's players, which is breaking their player contract, one they agreed to, they put it in his hands

Its completely relevant. All you care about is these guys getting hammered i try to look at the bigger picture. Fact is he listed pending cases as reason for suspension and he didnt have to.

in your opinion

Its not an opinion that he could have suspended them without listing pending cases as cause. That would be fact.

then what is he going to suspend them for? he might as well not suspend them because not listing any reasons for said suspension wouldn't hold up anywhere, and he'd definitely catch **** even Stalin recognized that he would need to lists reasons for executing people, even though they were made up, until his power became too great that he didn't have to

Youre again making stuff up. Offer any sort of evidence on your Stalin assertion. Its garbage not even worth addressing on its merit.

And according to you all he has to do is say they are detrimental not specifically list pending casees so why did he then? Thats my whole problem.

it does strike me as rather funny that 2 of the players who should really be concerned w/ the fairness of this process have agreed to it

What they agree to or not is not the issue here. They have their nuts in a vise and they know it because the commisioner is within hsi power to do what he wants in this regard that still changes nothing in my stance.

[quotebtw, 8 games is only 3 games more than the suspension Albert Haynesworth got[/QUOTE]

i should have qualified the statement with the off the field conduct policy.

wait, noone ever said that, certainly not Fuzzy

btw, don't have to defend me from Fuzzy's childish remarks, even though they are appreciated

You guys keep crowing this as if you actually accomplished something. I was wring fine but what i do remember is both of you making the CBA comments and then when i asked to demonstrate where you couldnt do it. Heck it even took Adam 150 posts over days to demonstrate it.

But once again this is a case of you riding someone elses coattails. Must suck to never have any accomplishments of your own.